VARUN AGGARWAL Vs. POOJA AGGARWAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petition is against the maintenance granted at Rs. 7,000/ - per month for the wife and child. The contention by the husband was that the wife was previously married to another person whose marriage was dissolved by a decree of divorce and at the time of dissolution of marriage, she had taken a permanent alimony of Rs. 24 lacs. The petitioner had not made any disclosure of the same and had filed the petition for interim maintenance. According to him, he is not himself possessed of any means and he is working in his father's hosiery business. The lower Court had assessed the maintenance at Rs. 7,000/ - and the revision is filed contending that he is earning only Rs. 8,000/ - in his father's factory and it is not possible for him to give any more amount. Learned counsel for the respondent would join issues by pointing out that the husband's own showing is that he is living with his aged parents who are unable to take care of themselves and it is an admission that he is taking care of the business. He is making a huge earning and he is making a false revelation that is earning Rs. 8,000/ - per month only.

(2.) NORMALLY , at the interlocutory stage of determination of maintenance, the Revision Court ought not to interfere with decision and I would not also place a heavy burden of proof on the wife to speak about the earning and look for appropriate disclosure to be made by the husband. In this case when the petition is filed under Section 24, the requirement in law is that a person, who defends or prosecutes a matrimonial proceeding, is sufficiently empowered and would not be found wanting in her daily needs. Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act itself states that a person who makes a claim shall be a person who has "no independent income sufficient for her support or his support and necessary expenses for the proceeding........" The plea regarding want of means is essential in order that Court passed appropriate orders. In this case, if she has come by benefit of an amount of Rs. 24 lacs as permanent alimony through her earlier marriage and she has not spoken to about the same in the petition filed for interim maintenance before the Court below and if the Court has awarded interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 7,000/ - per month, it has not definitely taken note of an admitted case that has come through a defence by the husband that his wife was beneficiary of a large sum as permanent alimony.

(3.) AT the time when notice of revision petition was ordered, I had directed Rs. 2500/ - to be paid every month and the petitioner shall also be liable to pay the litigation expenses as already granted. All the arrears were also directed to be paid at the said rate. The same amount granted through interim direction which I had taken is sufficient to take care of litigation expenses. I will make it clear that the interim order passed by me shall be the final order as well namely that the amount already determined shall stand reduced to Rs. 2500/ - per month. The order passed by the Court below stand modified and the civil revision is allowed to the above extent.